Arizona Public Hearing on Election Integrity

Trump campaign Attorney Rudy Giuliani spoke first, saying that the legislature of Arizona has complete and absolute power to regulate the selection of electors in a presidential election.

“Your political career is worth losing to save the right to vote in America,” said Giuliani,

Giuliani added that the Supreme Court ruled that state Houses and Senates can reclaim the power to name electors. Ellis said when the voice of the people is corrupted through fraud, it is the duty and obligation of the legislature to prevent false results from being certified.

But Arizona’s Secretary of State Katie Hobbs, a Democrat, said she has seen no evidence of irregularities or fraud that would overturn the results of the election.

Matt Braynard is the executive director of Look Ahead America and the Former Data Chief and Strategist for “Trump for President.” He spoke of his findings on early absentee votes from Maricopa County. He said 44 percent of people in this group never requested absentee ballots, but received one anyway. Braynard said he will update his findings as the other counties in Arizona release their data.

Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai spoke next. He holds four degrees from MIT, is a Fulbright Scholar, a world-renowned systems scientist, inventor, and engineer.

Ayyadurai looked at the official data from Arizona’s secretary of state and created a graph showing the cumulative votes for Biden and Trump. Using those results, he went through multiple computer simulations that used different combinations of vote allocations from different political parties that could reproduce what happened on election night.

After many different combinations of votes, one scenario matched the actual curves on election night almost perfectly. In this scenario, Biden got 130 percent of votes from Democrats and Trump got negative 30 percent of votes from Democrats.

“I find it highly implausible because this means that Mr. Biden got 130 percent of Democrat voters and President Trump got negative 30 percent,” said Ayyadurai.

Ayyadurai said that there are some ways these results could have occurred. One is that there is a demographic within Independent voters who voted for Biden that the model didn’t account for.  Another possibility is if Biden’s votes were multiplied by 1.3, meaning each vote for Biden actually became 1.3 reported votes and Trump’s votes were reduced by 0.3 votes.

He said a combination of these two things could have happened and noted he will continue to analyze the situation.